Appeal No. 93-4332
Application 07/707,717
A good test, and probably the only objective test,
for, “same invention,” is whether one of the claims
could be literally infringed without literally
infringing the other. If it could be, the claims do
not define identically the same invention.
In determining whether one claim could be literally
infringed without literally infringing the other, we must
determine the scope of the claims involved. To determine the
scope of the claims, the meaning of words in the claims may be
interpreted in light of the specification. During prosecution of
a patent application, the words in claims must be given their
broadest reasonable interpretation consistent with the
specification. In re Zletz, 893 F.2d 319, 321, 13 USPQ2d 1320,
1322 (Fed. Cir. 1989).
Application claim 1 calls for providing a monomer mixture
comprising a bisimide and triene and “subjecting said monomer
mixture to a non-gelling elevated temperature for a time
sufficient to increase the viscosity of the mixture and to
enhance the solubility thereof in an organic solvent.” According
to the specification, the phrase, “non-gelling elevated
temperature” is a temperature at which the composition will not
gel (specification, page 7, lines 1-4). The specification at
page 6, lines 26-30, also states that the temperature to which
the mixture may be heated is “at least about 130 C., preferablyo
o o
within the range of about 150 C to about 200 C., held for a time
5
Page: Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 Next
Last modified: November 3, 2007